Monday, July 04, 2016

In a conversation with Gavin McInnes while waiting for a subway train, I learned a new word: “cuckmercial.” That’s one of those TV commercials — one of the many, many — in which a clueless doofus male is set right by a smart, confident woman.

Browsing the Twitter feed later, I see that this is now a hashtag.

I’ll admit I wasn’t crazy about the “cuck-” prefix when it got started, but I’m seeing the light. Let’s try to get it up to dictionary-inclusion level. So far we have cuckservatives and cuckmercials. What else can we cuck-shame?

Well, there have been TV sitcoms along the same lines as those cuckmercials, going back to at least The Dick van Dyke Show. Cuck-coms!

I spotted the word “Cuckstians” in some comment thread, referring to Christians whose faith leads them out into missionary endeavors among people — preferably African — who accept their aid packages and medicines while laughing at the missionaries’ naive idealism when their backs are turned. Fair enough, I suppose, but I doubt “Cuckstians” will catch on: too hard to pronounce.

How about Cuck Lit.? Vanity Fair comes to mind, and Gone With the Wind. The memory’s dim, but I think The Wife of Bath’s Tale gets in there, too. And recalling the plot of Seeing Calvin Coolidge in a Dream, I think I may have contributed to the Cuck Lit. genre myself.

However, I wouldn’t advise going into a bookstore (supposing you can find one nowadays) and asking for the Cuck Lit. section. They’d probably just send you to the cookery books.

This is why we don't let Derb come up with the neologisms. Still, he's right in thinking that Cuckstian will never catch on - not only is it hard to pronounce but it sounds too much like "cockstain" - and anyhow, there is already a term that covers cuckservative Christians, which is "Churchian".

What usually causes a term to catch on is its effectiveness as rhetoric. Cuckmercial is good because it is rightly dismissive of both the subjects of the commercials and the commercials themselves. Cuckservative is even better, because it observably flays the soul of those to whom it applies. An offensive term is supposed to offend; one reason the Left is so alarmed by the #AltRight is because they have long intimidated conservatives by taking offense at inoffensive terms.

What are they going to do when faced with terms like "cuckservative" and "Churchian" and visual memes like the flag on the right? The contempt fairly drips off the rhetoric; it is very clear that any offense given is not incidental, but intended. This immediately puts the Left on the defense and leaves them unsettled, as they find it very frightening when their hisses of "racist" and "sexist" and "xenophobic" meet with indifference and derision.

I actually like the term "Neochristian"It lets you know exactly what they pretend to be while making it clear that they are definitely NOT Christian, not even belonging to one of those Christian churches that does not meet the Constantinian definition of 'Christian'

"Neochristian" means "We like to pretend we are Christians while simultaneously discarding every moral and ethical guideline of Christianity, and ignoring the social compact in the name of social justice. And P.S. The Bible sucks cause it's OLD and humanity has evolved beyond it."

driving around listening to insults passing off as journalism, journalists love to denigrate anything not them and theirs as "populism". If you aren't liberal educated you are a "populist right wing extremist xenophobe"/

"left wing populist" -- I think it has a place in counterattack.

but all this rides the great leviathan beast of "relativism". "stupefied by relativism" just means stupid.

No, I don't speak contraction. "Toilet Christian" usually suits my needs. I consistently meet Bush Worshippers who have no friggin clue what 'cuckservative' is supposed to mean. Utah is sort of HOME to the almighty Neocon, 'oh my heck', and Lime Jello salad. Nothing more complicated than 'douchehammer' works here.

I think I threw someone into absolute confusion when I point blank asked them 'what has Islam done for you personally?' A young medical doctor was totally dumbfounded. Her only possible response was "I know some really nice people who are Muslim"

Judging an ideology like marking a exam paper was beyond her cultural pay grade.

@6 I don't see the cucks as scared right wingers. I think the cucks are moderate leftists or perhaps leftists who package their ideology in terms that are more palatable to the right (e.g., open borders are good because Christian charity or free markets vs. diversity is good and kill whitey). It has been clear for decades that many leaders of the right (e.g., Bush, McCain) were true believers of leftist principles. The Trump candidacy forced these people to show their true colors. It is now clear that the GOPe failed to pursue a rightist agenda not because they are simply stupid, weak and corrupt but because they are philosophically opposed to the right wing agenda. Cuck is used to describe these sorts who call themselves conservatives, traditionalists, etc. and claim to be leaders of the right but in fact accept every left wing premise, worship open borders and foreign wars and squeal with glee at the opportunity to describe those on the right as racist rubes who are beneath contempt.

I don't think the term makes sense to refer to self-described liberals.

Lazy. Journalists are lazy. They don't read. I'm a reader. I read lots of things. One of them, you know, is the bible. Yes. It's true. And these journalists, these lazy journalists - not all of them, okay, not all of them, but the ones I mean - we all know, I've talked to them and they don't even know the words they're saying. They just say what they're told. They say what the next guy is saying. All they ever do. Some of the Laziest people I've ever known, these Journalists.

You don't speak Chinese, so stop trying to invent Chinese terms. You can't do it. I can always tell when some dialectic-speaker is trying to concoct a rhetorical neologism because he doesn't understand that the etymology is irrelevant.

Look at "homophobic", for example. Or "cuckservative". Do they make any etymological sense? No, and they are not supposed to. They simply tie together two recognizable terms in an emotionally-charged manner.

So, when you reach into your knowledge of Greek or Latin prefixes, attach them in a sensible way, then proudly announce how it makes sense, all you succeed in doing is to demonstrate that you have no idea how rhetoric operates.

Now, that's a perfectly sensible way to construct dialectical terms that have highly specific meanings, such as "omniderigent" and "scientage". But those terms are not rhetorical, are intended to inform, and are totally devoid of any emotional charge.

VD- Seriously, you don't want to encourage people to work on their rhetoric?I don't give up that easily. Even if I am incompetent at it, I can always improve.

"Churchian" has very very little impact. Most religious or semireligious people associate 'church' with 'decent', and even the 'ian' at the end simply doesn't make any sort of impression with the basic concept of church=moral.

If that means I have to keep experimenting, even inexpertly, with better terms to describe Judas goatfuckers, I will. I used to suck at drawing, too, and now I make a pretty decent living at it.

Churchian is better bc it hits across all denomanations w a sledgehammer implying they are simply playing church. They worship themselves doing all these "good things". Plus it doesn't require any knowledge to know it stings. Ask a 7yr old and he will get it. Ask someone from another faith and they get it.

It's not about what you think. Have you ever called an evangelical Christian that? I think the reaction might surprise you.

"Churchian" has very very little impact. Most religious or semireligious people associate 'church' with 'decent', and even the 'ian' at the end simply doesn't make any sort of impression with the basic concept of church=moral.

And there you go again. This is precisely why I told you to stop. You don't speak Chinese. Stop opining on the Chinese language.

Seriously, you don't want to encourage people to work on their rhetoric?

What I dislike, in this as in all things, is people who are observably incompetent trying to tell those who are much more accomplished how things should be done. I don't want them to work on it, I want them to shut up and learn.

The moment I hear "I think" or "I don't think" in this context, I know the person has missed the point. IT IS NOT ABOUT YOU OR YOUR OPINION. It is about the actual observed effect on the target, not what one hypothesizes the theoretical effect should be.

@18-You would be amazed at how much the term 'abnormal' pisses some people off. I think that's why they tried to invent the prefix 'cis-'(which has only really taken off among the hyperdykes and tranzies)to describe 'normal'.

When "cuckservative" first came into use, I was glad to hear Derb embrace it on his podcast. He didn't love the coarseness of it, but recognized its meaning and value, and ultimately said any term good enough for Jared Taylor is good enough for him.

I don't suppose many guys his age get the term, let alone are willing to use it.

@22 Don't forget popery, papists and, in relation to the Pope, anti-Christ. All centuries old terms used by Americans to clearly identify the "other". But these are mainly useful for marginalizing foreigners, especially ethnic Catholics who are deluded enough to think they are Americans. New terms like Churchian are needed for spineless, effeminate practitioners of Protestantism.

I think you might be on to something with this rhetoric thing, Vox. I kinda see what you're saying.

The problem is, as has been noted by many, conservatives are really just another branch of the left. Therefore they can be controlled and manipulated by shaming terms that have salience within the particular group they belong to, in this case, the left.

It was an illusion that conservatives did not belong to the left. Bruce Charlton makes an excellent argument that all non religious groups are basically leftist.

The alt right do not belong to the left so are unaffected by that groups shaming terms, but are terrified of being called gammas or being seem as not alpha. This is how you control and manipulate them so easily, and how readily they structure their lives around women's opinions.

I noticed how flummoxed you were when I was completely indiffetent to you trotting out your most devastating shaming tactic and calling me a gamma. Not knowing what to do, you left the thread.

So the lesson is clear - rhetoric is effective on in-group members, and ineffective on out-group members.

As a weapon against adversaries it merely makes allegiances clear and draws a line in the sand - its primary purpose is to discipline in-group members.

Of course, what you mean by rhetoric and what Aristotle did are two entirely different things, but that's a topic for another time.

weka, it doesn't work for the precise reason that for it to work the people being engaged have to have some recourse to doctrine, which they don't. Churchians are simply dumb. But what everyone has is "identity politics". Just rob them of their identity and you've won.ie. their church isn't the church.they aren't conservativethey aren't liberalthey aren't free thinkingthey aren't respectfulthey aren't knowledgeablethey aren't/ don't have history on their side

"Churchian" is very good because it's not a naive word that just attaches some generic bad word to Christianity, that's the adult equivalent of poopoohead-Christian. Rather, what it implies - and this doesn't need particular intelligence or education to understand - is that these people only care about attending Church services, and the social trappings of attending them. And they care nothing about following Christ.

It's not easy to invent a single word says something as advanced as that, and is still easily understood just by hearing it.

If a "cuckmercial" is one where a foolish man is schooled by a wise woman, we could use a good rhetorical term for the increasingly common advertising scenario where whites are led or schooled by blacks.

@25-"The alt right do not belong to the left so are unaffected by that groups shaming terms, but are terrified of being called gammas or being seem as not alpha. This is how you control and manipulate them so easily, and how readily they structure their lives around women's opinions."

How very odd. Perhaps it is due to overexposure to Neoreaction, But I don't see how being a 'decent and intelligent follower' would terrify anyone compared to being an alpha thug.

Sure, Alphas are generally leaders, but most of them suck at actually leading. Betas are the ones that really run things and have all the power. Alphas are simply utterly disposable figureheads.

The best part is, a reasonably intelligent Beta is easily capable of simulating alpha. In fact, they usually make better alphas than the alphas do!

"'In particular rape and the sexual abuse of children in bathing establishments have given us grave cause for concern."..."Ever since then the number of migrants - men from sexually repressive Muslim countries - attacking scantily clad women and children at swimming baths has continue to soar." ..."The clarification of the cases was 'particularly difficult' because of the numbers of people in the mobs."

So we now have even the police admit these are not isolated incidents. Migrants gang up and rape women and children.

One migrant rapefugee was given six year for sodomizing a child

"... a 10-year-old was raped in an Austrian swimming pool by an Iraqi migrant.

The horrific attack was so violent that the young boy needed to be treated at the Children's Hospital, and is now plagued by massive post-traumatic stress disorder.

Goran went to a lifeguard in tears after the attack but the Iraqi involved in the attack was so brazen that he had not even left the swimming pool."

Even if you don't speak Chinese, you don't need to be an expert to notice that the few Chinese words you try to speak are completely incomprehensible to the intended audience.

What part of "just stop" did you find hard to understand? You don't need to be an expert, but you clearly don't know what you're talking about.

The whole "trust me, I am superbly educated and you are an idiot. Don't even try" thing works a lot better on brain dead neomarxists.

That may be true. That's also irrelevant. It is a matter of simple observation that I know how to effectively utilize rhetoric. It is also a matter of simple observation that you do not understand what rhetoric is, its purpose, or how to utilize it.

I understand that you're trying to help. But you're not helping, so just stop already.

Apparently it can be. It's not intended as rhetoric, but much like "Negro" or "dirty", because of its intrinsically negative connotations it is seen as an insult even by those to whom it quite obviously applies.

It is rhetorically effective on those who are, or fear that they are, of low socio-sexual status. It is totally ineffective when thrown at those who are secure in their status, high or low. That's why Scalzi reacts so strongly to it while I don't. He is low status and he absolutely hates being reminded of it.

I ask because it's a dialectical term that requires specific non-widespread knowledge to understand, unlike the "cuck-" variants, and yet it seems to drive targets crazy (e.g. Scalzi)

Rhetoric isn't just the word but also the context. In what tone was it said, with which intention. Relevant is how it makes the target feel.

Take the example right out of this thread

Amazing, how they ALWAYS manage to bring the subject back to themselves. Shut the fuck up, Gamma.

On this target it will be highly effective. We all know how the Gamma will react to it. The word isn't used to convey information (as soon as he said "We Are Kangz and shiet") it was already revealed what he is. Gamma here is used to convey distaste and disgust.

It appears that only ones that really care about the term are generally those who take the whole Roosh thing WAY too seriously.

It's kind of a weird model. A lot of people prefer the 2 dimensional 'dominant/submissive' and 'selfish/selfless' axis.'Alpha' the way gamers play it is generally 'dominant/selfish' because that is the attitude that generally makes it easiest to score with sluts.

From context, Gamma is probably 'submissive/selfish', which, if you actually are 'submissive/selfish' might cause you to pout.

Misguided effort to think betas are the ones that stimulate alphas.Alphas only look to Omegas because of their individual strength, they are the ones who set the tone because quite frankly they don't give a shit about their power struggle but instead use them to further push their own self interest.Alphas, betas and gammas are useful idiots.

So you consider Those who build and create infrastructure, raise food, and actually steer the direction a culture heads to be inferior? The ones who's failure to apply discipline and ignore temptation are what have destroyed the very culture they created in the first place are unimportant?

Leaders rise and fall by the quality of their followers, and are vastly more replaceable than the masses they lead.

Back on topic: I've had great success angering leftists by taking them down reason river.Almost all of them are pro-immigration and anti-racism, by explaining to them how this could be considered genocide you will no doubt promote them to reason their "plans" in some form. It is at this point you kindly compare them with the last group of people who reasoned genocide and quelled opposition and implemented hate speech laws, Nazis.For whatever reason it breaks their brains, there is no doubt some rhetoric to find in there somewhere. I'm no good at it, but my suggestion would be Brownskins.

Almost all of them are pro-immigration and anti-racism, by explaining to them how this could be considered genocide you will no doubt promote them to reason their "plans" in some form. It is at this point you kindly compare them with the last group of people who reasoned genocide and quelled opposition and implemented hate speech laws, Nazis.

Well, if this thread has gone the way of "what makes good rhetoric", then here's my observation. Atheists get REALLY mad when I tell them that Atheism is just another religion. It sort of just stops them in their tracks. I suppose telling some science lover that they have faith in science might be similar. Not sure if any masters of rhetoric around here could some up with a single word to convey those ideas.

Regarding a previous argument that rhetoric only works to discipline members of you own "group", I would point out that "homophobe" and "racist" are used by one group against opposing groups/ideas.

@59 and @61 Accepting all the left's premises and then trying to outargue them is not a successful strategy. It is textbook cuckservatism. If you are on the right, your concern is promoting your culture and protecting your community, not demonstrating you love minorities the most and have no in group preferences.

@66 Bobby FarrI never accepted their premise, I also did not try to outargue them only compare them to what they historically compare best as which they loathe, or claim to loathe.I also never tried to demonstrate that I love minorities so I am a little confused what made you think that?Though Jared Taylor does promote minorities and personally I find his strategy appealing.Diversity in thoughts and opinions is unlike ethnic diversity actually a strength.

Christian: One who believes Jesus Christ is the only way to Jehovah, the God of the Old Testament, the Jealous God.

Christun: short for ChristUnbeliever. Claims to be a Christian but does not actually believe the words of Jesus Christ and the Bible. Is actually a basic-bitch progressive Moral Therapeutic Deist: believes she is a "good person", and aims her shallow superstition in the nominal direction of the culturally-dominant deity. Like any poser, kills whatever church she's permitted to infiltrate. Cf. salt, dunghill.

Note that women disproportionately belong to both groups, since the number of Western women actually under male authority is similar to the number of women which cover their hair in public. As Solomonpointed out, women are feckless in independence:

"...one man among a thousand have I found; but a woman among all those have I not found. Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions."

I have to admit, this is the first time I've seen the term ''cuckmercial''. The instant I did, I understood exactly what it meant - an ad that is more about promoting something other than it's intended good or service.You tell me what this TV ad is selling it ain't just Cheerios that's for sure.

@72, I don't think it's a plan exactly, but they're aware they're doing it. They've learned over recent years that if you show a man leading/teaching a woman, you risk charges of sexism. Likewise you're racist if you portray a white teaching a non-white something. So they take the path of least resistance and make sure that doesn't happen by going the other way. If you're casting an ad where one member of the family buys a bad product and the other explains why they should have bought your Good Product, you cast the husband as the dummy and the wife as the smart one, so you're safe.

It's just that in the last few years they've all started consistently following this model. That makes sense, because the more of them that did, the more harassment was left to concentrate on the ones that hadn't gotten on board yet. It's reached ridiculous levels now that entire commercial breaks go by somtimes without a white male appearing unless he's the goat.

However, if you point this out dialectically, you sound like a whiner. Men/whites aren't supposed to complain, and there may be no way to sound good doing it. So we need rhetorical ways to draw attention to it and ridicule it.

The first rule of rhetoric is you don't talk about rhetoric. In other words, if you have to explain it, it's not rhetoric so start over and try again. Your average mouthbreather should be able to work it out on his own. The Left never explained what racist meant, they just called conservatives that who took the bait and pleaded "No I'm not!"

@ 43Oh, there could be a place for Orchristian: the transgoblin who demands the bible is changed to allow her habits. Seen at PCUSA and Methodist congresses.

No. Tolkien has so owned that term that it refers to a people so inhuman that they must be fought tooth and nail. Orc can be used in association with Moslims, even Mexicans (Magic dirt plus Mexican creates Orxican?): Europe and America are being invaded by orcs (Orclims? Orxicans?). We need a term that identifies those elites and their useful idiots who desire and promote such invasions: they are (((saurumons and wormtongues))); yet these terms are too arcane; at least orcs are found in gaming.

"Wormtongue" comes close. We need to think like nineteenth century writers who gave their characters names corresponding to the characters' personalities and roles.

6 oikophobia in a more emotionally resonant way Mudshark or cultural mudshark.

I don't see the cucks as scared right wingers.

They are sell outs who want to whore everyone's kid's future out for money, that includes the neo-con/cohens

We need a Cuckometer. Don't mix the oral with the rectal ones.

A cuckometer measured in Clintons? Most things would be microClinton size

Clinton was not really cucked as he was happier to have other women eat the carpet for him.

You tell me what this TV ad is selling it ain't just Cheerios that's for sure.

They are trying to sell that blacks will be around their mudsharks spawn. I recall it was posted here that only 2% of blacks that have spawn with mudsharks support them. Actually we should come up with a way to use that fact as rhetoric to cause chimpouts. Does anyone have a link to the original data as I don't think it was actually given that way?

are the people who make those commercials part of some deliberate plan to run down males, or are they just unthinkingly following a social trend?

If that was the case black/mestizo males would be portrayed at least as stupid as white/Asian males, instead of smarter than you will ever meet in your lifetime.

That's what I thought when I first noticed it as well, but it is becoming increasingly difficult ignoring the pattern.If nothing else there is some shrouded influence, if that is not the case it is still incredibly damaging to the social cohesion within white society.The white men are usually belittled so white women stop respecting them, then interracial couples are portrayed as perfect.

"Men/whites aren't supposed to complain"That is exactly what they want and promote through feminism (It's ok to cry, all men do it.), to make white men seem weak and feminized.Cuck is the rhetorical way of drawing attention to it, perhaps more rhetoric would be good but cuck is very effective.

It took me a few tries to read Cuckstian not Cuckistan.Which is kind of a brainworm, perhaps with a specifier, like when they quote a Congress"man" in the paper:"I'm useless" says Jeff Merkel (R, Lower Cuckistan)

It is clear that Dire Badger subscribes to the 'You didn't build that' Obama school of thought.

Due to his midwittery, he fails to realise that a flip through the pages of history would show that leaders are often exceptional individuals who significantly impact the lives of all those around them. They are not 'easily replaceable' as you would like to think, and they are not in anyway secretly subservient to the 'betas who hold all the real power'

Sorry to crush your fantasies.

P.S Stop doubling down as it only makes you look worse. Vox outlined those three laws for a reason.

@79, I just mean it's not a "plan" in the sense that I don't think there's a directive that goes out from Leftist Central saying, "This month, decree #9823 goes into effect, requiring at least 50% of office bosses to be black." It's a lot of people with the same beliefs following the same cues, resulting in a definite pattern.

I wonder if ad companies call up casting companies and ask for these patterns by name. Like maybe they say, "Give us the Ray Romano," meaning a soft-but-not-fat husband who can play dumb, a smart-but-attractive wife, and 2-3 kids to complete the set. It's such a common setup that there has to be a name for it. Or the Professional Office Set, featuring a black man, a woman (one of whom will be the boss and the other the second in command), an Asian (Indian if it's for IT), and maybe a white guy if one's available -- he can be the goat or just be in the background taking notes while the others talk.

@82 Cail CorishevI concur, but there is definitely something influencing these people to have these beliefs so they follow the narrative.There might just be a "decree #9823" though, we hear about minority hires all the time.We must not forget that these patterns are not exclusive to commercials; TV-shows, movies and "news" media have them as well.In fact if you go to google and do a image search for "White man with white woman" you may be surprised just how blatant and wide spread it is.The scary part is the governments involvement, one would think the government in say, Sweden should do what is best for the Swedish people and not everyone else.There is definitely something going on.

However, if you point this out dialectically, you sound like a whiner. Men/whites aren't supposed to complain, and there may be no way to sound good doing it. So we need rhetorical ways to draw attention to it and ridicule it.---

No. Tolkien has so owned that term that it refers to a people so inhuman that they must be fought tooth and nail. Orc can be used in association with Moslims, even Mexicans (Magic dirt plus Mexican creates Orxican?): Europe and America are being invaded by orcs (Orclims? Orxicans?). We need a term that identifies those elites and their useful idiots who desire and promote such invasions: they are (((saurumons and wormtongues))); yet these terms are too arcane; at least orcs are found in gaming.

God-tier internet rhetoric is very, very hard. Look how brutally effective 'cuck' has been. That one word has been more disruptive politically than all the money ever spent on conservative think tanks.

Now consider that no one left, right, or alt-right has been able to replicate it yet. Maybe 'cuck' is a platonic form, and there just aren't that many other forms in harmony with it.

I almost feel pity for the people here that can't speak rhetoric and are trying to force some rhetorical meme.

Heretic? Ouch, such bad rhetoric. Have you ever tried calling a modern Churchian a heretic? You get a puzzled look. Not only is that a word that hasn't been in use for decades, perhaps centuries, but intuitively, they understand that Catholics, Protestants, Mormons, etc. have been calling each other heretics for a long time. It's lost its sting.

Churchian stings more because it insinuates very clearly - without explanation - that the person isn't worthy of being attributed under the name of Christ. It also, like Markku said, emphasizes that the person is only in it for warming up the pews. It paints them as lukewarm, lazy, ignorant (and by extension, stupid) slobs. One of the worst insults under heaven these days that you could hurl at such a person.

Remember, the best rhetoric is based on the truth. The truth is a sharp blade; wielding it dialectally is to engage in a fair swordfight, but wielding it rhetorically is to stab the unsuspecting foe in the heart out of the shadows, twisting the blade to inflict maximum pain.

In a war of shadows, the honorable, gallant knight is felled before he can raise his sword. Don't be the hapless knight.

Jhn 10:34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

He knew damn well that his being the only-begotten Son of God is a qualitatively different kind of claim than the "elohyim" used of Israel's judges. But he also knew that the scribes couldn't answer this question.

What term can one use for people so thoroughly cucked that they allow their own offspring to be raped by invaders and do nothing to remove the enablers - the politicians, courts and police who opened the gates and use their authority to enable and cover up the crimes? Jo Cox absolutely had it coming (even if it stinks of false-flag). She was merely one of many hundreds, likely thousands. Chruchians who re-settle the barbarians have it coming as well. It's not just UK and Germany either, the Idaho prosecutor of the Sudanese (or Somalian) refugees has threatened action against those who mention the crimes of the new colonists in less than respectful terms. Lügenpresse has it coming also, for lying endlessly. Somehow "cucked" seems quite inadequate for such hapless fools.

No. Tolkien has so owned that term that it refers to a people so inhuman that they must be fought tooth and nail. Orc can be used in association with Moslims, even Mexicans (Magic dirt plus Mexican creates Orxican?): Europe and America are being invaded by orcs (Orclims? Orxicans?). We need a term that identifies those elites and their useful idiots who desire and promote such invasions: they are (((saurumons and wormtongues))); yet these terms are too arcane; at least orcs are found in gaming.

...if it requires saying, and this pains me: Obviously "churchian" is #1 in category. People wanna call themselves "Christian" because thesaurus reflects 2000 years of +rep. "Churchian" cuts the virtue signaling at the knees, and questions belonging, which is pure unadulterated rabbitspeak.

It eviscerates their strategy of diluting, isolating and ostracizing K's. It is emotional language unmistakable to dimwits. It illuminates their shitstained souls. Perfect.

Didn't "cuck" just take off not because of the effect it had on "the target" but because it adequately captured a certain perception those who adopted the term had? People in semi-mainstream channels are currently discovering the way it's being used (Rogan), so it's not as if this was about them to begin with.

Everything we do is first and foremost about us. Others are of secondary concern. This is why they have to play catch up after the fact. This is why they have to make "expose" concerning what they call the sub-culture.

Why should we think of them when doing anything? Some people in this thread are currently trying to come up with some "-phobe" words. Isn't that a mistake, since you're basically trying to operate from a framework the left developed? "Homophobe", "islamophobe", "xenophobe", these are leftist smear words implicitly relying on their worldview. Whenever you use one in the same way, you're reinforcing it, acknowledging it, and thus give the leftists more power. The word "cuck" draws its force from another kind of worldview, another set of values.

In other words, "cuck" didn't catch on because of what it did to someone else, which is still a way in which you remain dependent on the people you target, but rather because it corresponded to the internal logic of the group that adopted it.

Nice. That -philia is basically just an intensifier, but with a really creepy vibe.

On reflection, it also broadens the term. Makes it more useful against the Latin and Jewish cuck promoters who are all, "How do you do, fellow white Americans?" It isn't their nation to give away, but they're acting like it.

@74 "They've learned over recent years that if you show a man leading/teaching a woman, you risk charges of sexism. Likewise you're racist if you portray a white teaching a non-white something."

Partly. (Please perceive each generalization preceded by the "well-duh" word: most.) Studies have shown that blacks will buy products / support something if the ads show blacks buying / supporting. Whites will consider the product or idea before deciding whether or buy or support.

Blacks are substantially less likely to consider buying / supporting a product or idea advertised using Whites. Whites WILL consider, still, the product or idea, no matter what race is portrayed / used.

No one ever accused advertising agencies of honor -- and they may not be converged, but they must do what "works." (I think they're probably mostly converged...)

No. Tolkien has so owned that term that it refers to a people so inhuman that they must be fought tooth and nail. Orc can be used in association with Moslims, even Mexicans (Magic dirt plus Mexican creates Orxican?): Europe and America are being invaded by orcs (Orclims? Orxicans?). We need a term that identifies those elites and their useful idiots who desire and promote such invasions: they are (((saurumons and wormtongues))); yet these terms are too arcane; at least orcs are found in gaming.

"Wormtongue" comes close. We need to think like nineteenth century writers who gave their characters names corresponding to the characters' personalities and roles.

Gandalf referred to Wormtongue as a snake. The terms Lizards, Serpents, Reptilians, and Draconians are also available.

Gen Kong, I think it is time to reclaim nigger. When the megachurchian wannabes at PCUSA allow the orcs from Black Lies Matter onto their congress platform (and yes, Rule 32: look at the twitterstream) then they are broken and done.

If you want brutal rhetoric, bring back Chris Rock: "Black woman slaves her ass off to feed her kids so Niggers steal it".

@74, @89 It's so bad in the evangelical churches that it needs its own name, cuckaganda.

Every, and I mean every, "Christian" teaching "resource" shows the white boy as weak, ignorant, sinning, or being forgiven by wise children of color - that is, if he's even pictured. Jesus is a soft smiley friend in the background, who approves.

However, the Churchians who swallow and spread this crap are often passionate believers, brainwashed by decades of ingesting "I'd like to teach the world to sing' cuckmercial programming, along with massive amounts of corn syrup. (Side note: are most cucks obese?)

We are on our last-straw church. Thanks to VD and these discussion threads for some inspiration to hang in there and engage rhetorically.

I have no objection to reclaiming nigger in some way. My question above refers to the pathetic herd of cattle who make no objection as the Idaho prosecutor threatens them if they demonstrate some crimethink about the Sudanese colonizer/child-rapists. Even here in the dark reaches of the dark enlightenment, there's not been a great deal of discussion this recent outrage. We can be reasonably sure that Churchians - or possibly (((the usual suspects))) got government money to resettle the invaders into rural Idaho (this is part of so-called the Northwest redoubt), but we have a term for them: SJWs. It's those who refuse to see even when the truth is before their lying eyes. Perhaps "nigger" is an appropriate term for them. I suspect there's too much baggage of various kinds (not just the one SJWs like to give their dime-store moralizing about) with that word for it to be of much use rhetorically. I do think Churchians is better than Cuckstains, for the reasons given above.

Also, Churchian definitely works. The effect it has on people is pretty devastating. Mind you I kind of don't take a very measured approach to it because generally I use it just before "scum" and "worse than actual satanists, because they hide among us!"

But even in polite company "Churchians" gets a laugh from those who agree and hormonal attacks from those who feel offended.

I then take great pleasure in demonstrating their ignorance of all things actually Christian. The result of gradual submission in public due to dialectic hammered home by rhetoric blows is a work of art to see. And I'm still a heathen.

If I ever acquire the type of book knowledge of the Bible someone like Markku has, I'll become positively insufferable. Make JCW look like a most forgiving liberal in all his Catholic pronounciations.Thinking of going with Torquemada for a baptism name...

With that link, it combines the rhetoric of disgust with the dialectic of pathology. Without the link, it should work just as well against all pro-cucks -- including even non-residents such as Carlos Slim, who is a goddamned cuckophile, producing cuck for money.

I'm hoping that elaborates the concept without muddying it: as with the producers of cuck fetish porn, he's enabling it for a profit.